1. Agreed. But I think you misunderstand the idea I'm chasing after. The counterbalance is not intended to support the stand and hammock all by itself. I was thinking that the weight, when in the hammock, could be used to help alleviate the pull force on the stand by pulling on the stand from the opposite side. Does that make more sense?

2. I am having to look at the pictures on my phone, so I may have missed something, but here is my take on it:

I don't think the leveraging arm will have any reduction in the pull on the guy-lines. Overall, the stand has to over-come the compression forces along the top of the hammock and I don't see anything in that leverage arm itself that will reduce that.

The main difference between this and using one end of my stand is the extension legs (and that is huge). They will impact the pull on the guy lines by counter-acting against the leverage of the pole.

I do see the leverage arm having an impact on the strength of the forward extension leg. However, I would be careful of the connection point for that arm as it will have a tremendous amount of stress on the pivot point. It could very easily snap right there. Personally, I think a hard connection for the support, instead of a levered arm would work just as well.

3. As promised

A picture paints a thousand words (I hope). In the diagram the arrows represent forces. The length is proportional to the size of the force (is size correct? I am not a native speaker). I could bore you to death with sinus, tan and cosines to calculate the relation between the forces. Bottom line is that each stake needs to hold approximately 40% of your weight in the direction given in the diagram. That is a lot. The force on the base plate will be about 150% of your weight, but that will not be your first concern.

BTW have a look at the anchor of the treemount stand. It is supplied with 6 double stakes!

4. Originally Posted by peteypk
Agreed. But I think you misunderstand the idea I'm chasing after. The counterbalance is not intended to support the stand and hammock all by itself. I was thinking that the weight, when in the hammock, could be used to help alleviate the pull force on the stand by pulling on the stand from the opposite side. Does that make more sense?
I think we understand what you are thinking...the system will take some of the pull off of the stakes. In fact, the extended base will do just that...extent it far enough and you have a self supporting stand as others have built (with two ends connected).

As I stated earlier though, the "rope and pulley" system just sets up opposing forces that cancel each other out. Or I'm wrong.

As a side note, I do have a perpetual motion machine and I am looking for investors if anyone is interested.

Edit...glad to see others type faster.

5. I'm afraid they're right not that I know what I'm talking about. Having your hammock suspension loop down the upright and loop back up the other side to attach again at the top doesn't really accomplish anything except stress those attachment points.

However, if you extend the base, say about 7 feet or so, so that it butts up against that tree, you might be on to something.

(don't mind me...)

6. Originally Posted by hppyfngy
However, if you extend the base, say about 7 feet or so, so that it butts up against that tree, you might be on to something.

(don't mind me...)
BRILLIANT! Now why didn't I think of that?!?!

7. Keep working gang, keep working. I just love how you all think. I'm totally brain dead on the stands and have yet to find my perfect one. Looks like I'll be starting with the turtledog, but I'm like petepk and still looking for the ideal stand.

8. I am just not sure that the "stakes" could be sufficient enough strength to create the ballast effect you are looking for. I suppose you could use those big party tent stakes that they hammer into the ground, but that would not exactly be easily portable and quick to setup. Keep in mind in your thinking to not only consider your static weight, but when you are in your hammock and move- creating any bouncing...this movement is a force multiplier that dramatically increases the demands on your stand. This addresses inward force and there will be side ward force occasionally when you swing horizontally in the breeze. I do like your Sketchup drawings..a mind in action!

9. By the way, I am an engineer, and I'm trying real hard to NOT sound like a smarty pants, but there are a few flaws in your design. While it would probably work, it's overly complex and has a weak point that could cause it to fail.

Originally Posted by Tjalling
This picture pretty much says it all. All you've done is brace the pole so it can transfer more force into the ground, and while that does reduce the forces on the guy lines, the same effect could be accomplished by moving the bottom of the pole towards the hammock.

Another problem with your design is that the brace acts laterally on the center of the main pole, while the lines are pulling on the end. Hollow metal poles are not good at being levers, so the pole could bend at the bolt, depending on the thickness/strength/material. Poles are very strong at resisting axial loads (like a column) so this is why (in general) they only have forces at the ends (ropes at one end, ground at the other, nothing in between).

Sorry for tearing apart your design. You can still use a telescoping pole and Almosa's anchors for a nice portable rig.

Posting Permissions

• You may not post new threads
• You may not post replies
• You may not post attachments
• You may not edit your posts
•